tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post4914347783739215957..comments2024-03-17T05:07:13.710-05:00Comments on Wuthering <br>Expectations: An almost total want of arrangement - all courses had been confounded - tasty Sartor ResartusAmateur Reader (Tom)http://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-44164232466985506782010-09-02T11:30:40.776-05:002010-09-02T11:30:40.776-05:00Thanks, Jeanne. I had good collaborators this wee...Thanks, Jeanne. I had good collaborators this week.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-75852379430407043172010-09-01T16:30:22.366-05:002010-09-01T16:30:22.366-05:00I loved the way this post was written, and that ev...I loved the way this post was written, and that evidently carries over even to the comments--Carlyle the "anti-Johnson"! Indeed!Jeannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374498643286099244noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-90043363737444834792010-08-26T09:06:51.412-05:002010-08-26T09:06:51.412-05:00I knew you'd be able to answer my question! I ...I knew you'd be able to answer my question! I had no idea there were diferent sorts of Utilitarianism. It makes sense of course but whenever in school days it would come up it was always JS Mill. Carlyle's take on slavery is rather disturbing and surprising. It also bothered Emerson very muchStefaniehttp://somanybooksblog.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-89822328411800608492010-08-25T23:54:54.742-05:002010-08-25T23:54:54.742-05:00Moby-Dick has really made me want to revisit Sir T...<i>Moby-Dick</i> has really made me want to revisit Sir Thomas Browne. Soon, maybe. Who knows.<br /><br />Mostly, you read the books you ought to be reading.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-48700151565117803742010-08-25T19:40:35.213-05:002010-08-25T19:40:35.213-05:00I love 17th-century prose! Or at least I did in th...I love 17th-century prose! Or at least I did in that college class I took way back a long time ago. I'm hoping to read some Sir Thomas Browne in the not-too-distant future. I guess SR is for me, eventually.Dorothy W.http://ofbooksandbikes.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-24796610939226197242010-08-25T18:23:35.995-05:002010-08-25T18:23:35.995-05:00Ah, 17th and 18th century English prose...ahem...y...Ah, 17th and 18th century English prose...ahem...yes...you see...that would be Ultimate Humiliation Time. Have not read...anything? Except for what you've seen on my blog, I think. I am way ahead of myself doing so much 19th century biz, let alone 20th (and 21st). This is why I'm always saying I need to go back to the "beginning."<br /><br />I think I would fall more on the masochism than machismo side, except that it's fun. I guess masochism is fun for masochists, though.nicolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17532641082944082516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-3259769202002460872010-08-25T17:20:15.556-05:002010-08-25T17:20:15.556-05:00I'm maybe just a little too attracted to book...I'm maybe just a <i>little too </i> attracted to books few people should read. Machismo. Or masochism. <br /><br />How strong is your taste for 17th century English prose? Carlyle is the anti-Johnson here, anti-18th century. No more perfectly balanced sentences and smoothly ordered thoughts. Instead, nonsense, chaos, digressions from digressions, cheap jokes and depthless irony.<br /><br />I was just looking at the <i>Cambridge Companion</i>, and it has Melville reading <i>Sartor Resartus</i> during the composition of <i>Moby-Dick</i>, which makes sense. But what about the chaotic <i>Mardi</i>? Melville didn't need Carlyle's example to write a wandering book.<br /><br />So, nicole, yes! There's the Melville connection, plus Carlyle is the man bringing the German Romantics into English. <i>Sartor Resartus</i> is cousin to E.T.A. Hoffmann and Goethe.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-62798312382774327322010-08-25T17:01:54.307-05:002010-08-25T17:01:54.307-05:00Brief mentions of Sartor Resartus already had it o...Brief mentions of <em>Sartor Resartus</em> already had it on my list, but now you've got me wanting to read it beyond what any reasonable person should want. Because I really, really need another book that I'll read over and over and still not understand, and all.<br /><br />But it certainly does sound like my thing, doesn't it?nicolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17532641082944082516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-54630919208279272512010-08-25T16:42:54.722-05:002010-08-25T16:42:54.722-05:00You and Stefanie and totally talking me into consi...You and Stefanie and totally talking me into considering reading SR. Not anytime soon, but it's now a possibility instead of the highly unlikely thing it was. But how can I resist the challenge of "books few people should read"?Rebecca H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10825532162727473112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-76432097039738726312010-08-24T12:09:06.553-05:002010-08-24T12:09:06.553-05:00I think I know the answer.
J. S. Mill and Caryle ...I think I know the answer.<br /><br />J. S. Mill and Caryle were friends, yes. The Utilitarianism Carlyle attacks so ruthlessly is that of Jeremy Bentham and John Mill. John Stuart Mill, by this point (mid-1830s), was not a Benthamite. His own Utilitarianism was a much more subtle and humanistic set of ideas, influenced partly by Carlyle. <br /><br />That Mill and Carlyle later fell out over slavery is thus an irony.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-70803314587161778622010-08-24T10:39:17.892-05:002010-08-24T10:39:17.892-05:00Very lucky it isn't Blog Sweeps Week!
I bet ...Very lucky it isn't Blog Sweeps Week! <br /><br />I bet you can answer this. Carlyle did not like Utilitarianism and I can't say I blame him, but yet John Stuart Mill was in possession of his manuscript for the first volume of his book on the French Revolution which met with an unfortunate accident. Were Mill and Carlyle friends? If they were it is astonishing, considering the battering Utilitarianism takes in <i>Sartor</i>. There must be story there and I'm betting you know it :)Stefaniehttp://somanybooksblog.comnoreply@blogger.com